Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/22/2013 9:40:21 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7859
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
Guys, I'm going to have to do this over multiple posts, so please let me get all the ideas posted before you comment.

DW is awesome, and shadows has just made it that much better, but...

There are always a few things I'd like to see added to the game. I will try to make this into an organized list of the things I'd like to see in the future...be it another expansion, or in a DW 2 scenario.

Ship Design:

I'd like to see some more development in ship design, namely being able to have multiple variants of ships for the same role. The problem now is the AI always chooses to upgrade to the last class you designed, so having 2 different DD types is redundant, the AI will always upgrade all DDs to the one you designed last. So how to fix this? I suggest the ability to assign ships a sub-role. That is, not only is this a Destroyer, but it is designed as an escort destroyer or an assault destroyer or a destroyer transport, etc. This would also help the AI to understand what type of fleets ships should be assigned to.

I'd break it down as follows for each role:

The Escort Sub-roles:

-- Escort (general escort)
-- Assault (to be used in heavy attack fleets)
-- Hunter (carries assault pods)

The Frigate Sub-roles:

-- Escort
-- Assault
-- Hunter
-- Transport (can carry troops)

The Destroyer Sub-roles:

-- Escort
-- Assault
-- Hunter
-- Transport

The Cruiser Sub-roles:

-- Assault
-- Hunter

The Capital Ship Sub-roles:

-- Assault
-- Hunter

The Carrier Sub-roles:

-- Escort (think of a light carrier used to provide fighter cover for another ship type as part of a fleet)
-- Assault

Troop Transport have no sub-roles, as they really are only good for 'amphibious' operations in the DW setting.

Why this is important would be to fleet formation by the AI. The player can handle manual fleets well enough, but the AI will stick any ship type in any fleet and has a great potential to use them in situations they are not suited for. This of course means you need fleet roles:

-- Assault fleet (heavy ships for ship to ship/ship to base combat)
-- Hunter Fleets (roam around trying to capture enemy ships)
-- Amphibious Fleets (landing troops on enemy planets for invasion or landing troops on friendly planets to bolster defenses/counter-attack)

I realize that this is a bit complicated, but it also gives the player and the AI a lot more flexibility in how to develop the fleet.

Changes to Freighters:

Right now, we have 3 sizes. Small, Medium, or Large with really no difference in how they operate. I have a better way, and wont even require new components unless Elliot wants to add them. Let's give them a role so we have a reason to build all three types, while I realize this isn't necessary it would be a nice thing to have:

--Tankers: Carry gases and fuels.
--Bulk Freighters: Carry ores such as gold, steel, polymer, etc
--Light Freighters: Carry the luxury goods



_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Post #: 1
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/22/2013 9:40:54 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7859
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
Diplomatic Missions:

Right now, our ambassadors can go to an empire and improve relations. What if we had a limited number of special missions we could send them on as well? Could be used to change how diplomacy works in DW as well, if we want to get that in depth. Now then, since missions rely on characters, we need to be sure that every empire always has at least one ambassador OR we can leave diplomacy as is though not having an ambassador to do the mission means it will be much, much harder to complete successfully:

Missions:

-- Assign as Ambassador (works exactly as it currently does, no changes)
-- Negotiate X (where X is any treaty we want to offer)
-- Sour Relations (go to one empire in order to sour their relations with another empire)
-- Improve relations (go to an empire in order to improve relations with our empire or on another empire's behalf)
-- Negotiate Alliance (explained below, different from an MDP)

Diplomacy: Alliances

Alliances are different from MDP, in that an Alliance is more like a 'Team' instead of just an agreement between 2 empires. Of course, it will need some mechanism to determine if an empire will join an alliance...much like the biases already in existence. For AI purposes, it would almost have to be set up in a way that would tell the various AI empires which alliances they are more likely to join. We could even pre-define some alliances...Say the Shaktur Alliance and the Freedom Alliance that certain races would be more likely to join. (IE bugs for Shaktur and Human, Kaidan, Ackdarian for Freedom).

This would be most useful for custom themes where the designer can define up to any number of difference Alliances that can either start already allied, or be joinable depending on the diplomacy choices of the AI and player.

If we have a simple text file like the biases that is simply names each empire down the left side and allows you to define any number of alliances along the top by number, with the alliance name listed below the table. A simple yes/no check in the races file would determine if the race in question is locked to a particular alliance, or just heavily biases toward it. IE Shakturi would ALWAYS be part of the Shaktur alliance, but the Boskara would only be likely to join, but could be convinced to join a different alliance via diplomacy. Also in the biases file, certain races could be defined as nuetral (say by using a 0 for preferred alliance). These empires would have to be wooed via diplomacy.

For an example, a theme designer wants to make a theme based on the Star Wars universe. And lets say he wants the following factions represented: Galactic Empire, Rebel Alliance, Corporate Sector, and Trade Federation. With the Alliances bias, he can define all 4 factions, and take each race and define the faction it will be part of OR the faction(s) it is likely to join. In other words, races should be able to be biased to more than 1 faction. Imperials would or course be locked to the empire, while a race named simply Human could join either Empire or Rebellion (IE if you have two Human empires in game, they may both join the same faction or one join faction X and the other join faction Y).

Alliance rules/perks:

-- Must have positive relations with all members to join, unless defined as always member in races file
-- Automatic MDP, fueling rights and mining rights between all members
-- If any member goes to war with another empire, all members automaticallya declare war (doesn't matter who starts the war either)
-- Boosted trade income and tourism income between alliance members
-- Small research bonuses (no more than 10% so we don't completely unbalance the game)
-- Small mining rate boost (again no more than 10% for balance)
-- Harder to sour relations between members
-- Once joined, it would take a lot to make a member switch sides, but not be impossible (IE the reliability gets boosted once the race has joined a faction)
-- Empires that fall below a certain relations thresh-hold with other members would leave the alliance...this would take a lot of work by other empires or the player to sour relations to this point though

< Message edited by Shark7 -- 6/22/2013 9:49:19 PM >


_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 2
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/22/2013 9:41:12 PM   
Shark7


Posts: 7859
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline
Intelligence Missions:

No major changes here, I'd just like to see a few more mission types made available.

New Mission Types:

-- Training: Your agents come trained, but this would be more of an advanced training with diminishing returns to get your agents to a more useful level. If the training succeeds, the agent gets experience gain in 1 or more skills. Having a spy academy could increase the experience gains.
-- Subterfuge: This mission is used to sour relations between two empires. The target empire is the one you are trying to turn against the object empire.
-- Damage Alliance: This would be a very hard mission used to decrease relations between alliance members (if alliances were implemented).
-- Kidnap a scientist: Unlike assassinate that simply removes the character from the game, this mission lets you bring the character to your empire as a prisoner forced to work for you
-- Rescue: Rescues a kidnapped scientist
-- Recruit: Convinces a character to join your empire willingly. If successful, character travels to your capitol *
-- Steal Credits: Tells your agent to go to an enemy empire and rob a bank...in generalized terms
-- Sabotage economy: If successful, triggers the 'Economic Crisis' disaster in the target empire

* The recruit mission will only be successful if the character does not have any patriot type traits, and the chance of success will be directly related to empire/colony happiness levels. This mission should be very hard to start with, with base success rate of 10% or less. Psy-ops would be the key skill needed for the mission.

Recruiting Agents:

Intel Agents should be recruitable to a max number based on population, with a hard-cap that can not be exceeded. Lets say you start being able to recruit up to 4, with 12 being the hard cap max. Perhaps this would be tied to the Spy Academy facility (perhaps the increase to 12 allowed agents requires building the Spy Academy).

OK, that's my wishlist, its open for discussion now. I realize not every one will agree with me, but variety is the spice of life after all.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 3
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/23/2013 12:50:15 AM   
ehsumrell1


Posts: 2508
Joined: 8/17/2010
From: The Briar Patch Nebula
Status: offline
GREAT ideas Shark7!

_____________________________

Shields are useless in "The Briar Patch"...

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 4
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/23/2013 4:35:25 PM   
WiZz

 

Posts: 331
Joined: 9/28/2011
From: Ukraine
Status: offline
Multiplayer...

(in reply to ehsumrell1)
Post #: 5
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/24/2013 5:22:26 AM   
arkhometha


Posts: 75
Joined: 5/18/2013
Status: offline
Well, Shark7, I agree with your wishes until Diplomacy: Alliances. I found your definition of alliances too... strict. For example, I don't think allies should be forced to go to war. Backstabbing should happen, nobody should be forced to automatically declare war. They should be asked if they want to go to war. I also don't think there should be any other benefits from alliances, like military or economically. Maybe some increased immigration, espionage chance between allies and maybe tourism, as you suggested. Allies relations should be good but they should deteriorate normally and there shouldn't be too much pre-definitions. Like, a pacific and a aggressive race shouldn't normally ally but there should be no problems between bugs and humans, or a "neutral" race to ally with aggressive or passive races.

Your suggestions to intelligence are okay. I'd add that race and empire policies should play a big role in intelligence and intelligence should have it's own tech tree (if it already has these things, pardon me, I forgot about it). For example, you should be able to recruit a boskara spy, either a mercenary or from your population, and it should have a better chance to steal tech from a boskara Civ than a human has, because humans don't find tech info laying around in the boskaran empire and should have a harder time invading facilities. Of course, empires with various races should be easier to penetrate than "pure" empires and planets, so exterminating or enslaving certain races could be useful now.


I think your wishlist is rather modest and that we should dream bigger.
In the diplomacy field, subjugation of one empire should be available to only one empire at the time. So if X empire is losing a war to Y empire and it accepts subjugation, only Y empire would have it subjugated and X would enter Y sphere of influence. Other empires, like Z, could have the option to demand, in war or diplomatically, the release of X as Y subjugated empire. Moreover, another subjugation option should be added: enthralling. You could have the option to enthrall a warring empire or escalate an already subjugated one in enthralling (by force). Being your thrall, the empire would be force to accept certain decisions. Maybe we could have several types of enthrallment, like economical, where the thrall a good portion of it's industry (capability to build ships), resources and money to yours. One research thrall would be subject to add it's research points to your, maybe even serving as living subjects to planet wide experiments that could result in the death of the subjects in the expense of rapid research. Or they could be Battle Thralls, serving in every war you declare, sending ships to battle and making peace and declaring war at your command. Think Kzer-Za Battle Thralls. Maybe all this could be interchangeable, you could convert one thrall type to another one, with some good chance of rebellion. Add on top of that the ability to target certain races for extermination/enslavement in your empire and the "evil" archetype would be mostly complete.

On the characters section, we have so much space for improvement. Every character should exist and be represented on map. That is, if I blow a research base that has X scientist character, he could have a chance to escape in a escape pod and be stranded there in space, represented by a tiny space pod, and the enemy could pick him up with a ship before you rescue him and interrogate or torture him to obtain help or info on new technologies or obtain info on the technologies your empire researched. Same thing could be done with admirals, spies and governors, each disclosing other information and making losing them more painful. Or they could be ransomed back to you. Maybe common soldier also would be stranded in escape pods when a ship blow ups and after capturing some of them the enemy empire could obtain some infos, or could ransom you back, every decision impacting relations and reputation. Torturing lowering your reputation and refusing to pay a ransom would also lead to further decrease. Spies could be made double agents and could be extracted this way. Ambassadors could be kidnapped before a war begins or even kidnapped by rebels (via event) in an unstable empire, souring relations and even leading to war.

Add on top of that a custom medal system (think Aurora 4X),where you can choose the medal from pre-determined or custom images and add names and a "relevance" of the award and give it to someone. For example, you could award one human scientist a Honor to the Merit Medal for his contributions in Science, raising his loyalty to you and making him work harder (acquire skills faster). The Admiral in charge of the huge battle of Epsilon Five that came out as a decisive victory in the human-boskaran war could win one "hero" medal for his service, making him a national hero and giving his troops and ships more morale. Moreover, having him killed, captured or refusing to pay a ransom for him could lead to different degrees of civil unrest as the national hero is important. That could lead to great attachment to certain characters. If we implement the double agent thing, unrewarded characters could be more prone to switch sides or even turn into spies/scientists, faking working for you while selling privileged info for your enemies. Add on top of that custom portraits and maybe a wage system and you have a complete and deep character system.

I guess I'm hijacking your post with my own wishlist. Sorry Shark, I was just trying to point out we can dream bigger.

< Message edited by arkhometha -- 6/24/2013 5:35:26 AM >

(in reply to WiZz)
Post #: 6
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/29/2013 2:14:48 PM   
Icemania


Posts: 1842
Joined: 6/5/2013
From: Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shark7

Diplomacy: Alliances

Alliances are different from MDP, in that an Alliance is more like a 'Team' instead of just an agreement between 2 empires. Of course, it will need some mechanism to determine if an empire will join an alliance...much like the biases already in existence. For AI purposes, it would almost have to be set up in a way that would tell the various AI empires which alliances they are more likely to join. We could even pre-define some alliances...Say the Shaktur Alliance and the Freedom Alliance that certain races would be more likely to join. (IE bugs for Shaktur and Human, Kaidan, Ackdarian for Freedom).

This would be most useful for custom themes where the designer can define up to any number of difference Alliances that can either start already allied, or be joinable depending on the diplomacy choices of the AI and player.

If we have a simple text file like the biases that is simply names each empire down the left side and allows you to define any number of alliances along the top by number, with the alliance name listed below the table. A simple yes/no check in the races file would determine if the race in question is locked to a particular alliance, or just heavily biases toward it. IE Shakturi would ALWAYS be part of the Shaktur alliance, but the Boskara would only be likely to join, but could be convinced to join a different alliance via diplomacy. Also in the biases file, certain races could be defined as nuetral (say by using a 0 for preferred alliance). These empires would have to be wooed via diplomacy.

For an example, a theme designer wants to make a theme based on the Star Wars universe. And lets say he wants the following factions represented: Galactic Empire, Rebel Alliance, Corporate Sector, and Trade Federation. With the Alliances bias, he can define all 4 factions, and take each race and define the faction it will be part of OR the faction(s) it is likely to join. In other words, races should be able to be biased to more than 1 faction. Imperials would or course be locked to the empire, while a race named simply Human could join either Empire or Rebellion (IE if you have two Human empires in game, they may both join the same faction or one join faction X and the other join faction Y).

Alliance rules/perks:

-- Must have positive relations with all members to join, unless defined as always member in races file
-- Automatic MDP, fueling rights and mining rights between all members
-- If any member goes to war with another empire, all members automaticallya declare war (doesn't matter who starts the war either)
-- Boosted trade income and tourism income between alliance members
-- Small research bonuses (no more than 10% so we don't completely unbalance the game)
-- Small mining rate boost (again no more than 10% for balance)
-- Harder to sour relations between members
-- Once joined, it would take a lot to make a member switch sides, but not be impossible (IE the reliability gets boosted once the race has joined a faction)
-- Empires that fall below a certain relations thresh-hold with other members would leave the alliance...this would take a lot of work by other empires or the player to sour relations to this point though

This is a great suggestion. I'd love to have an alliance of Bugs gang up on me and go to all out war e.g. if they saw that they starting to fall behind. In particular, it could be a great to make the mid-late game more eventful and challenging.

(in reply to Shark7)
Post #: 7
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 6/29/2013 3:25:14 PM   
Simulation01


Posts: 540
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
All of Shark7's ideas would be welcome to me. I won't hold my breath though.

_____________________________

"Tho' much is taken, much abides; and though we are not now that strength which in old days moved Earth and Heaven; that which we are, we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts, made weak by time and fate, but strong in will." -Tennyson

(in reply to Icemania)
Post #: 8
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/1/2013 1:58:55 PM   
Seath

 

Posts: 35
Joined: 6/14/2011
Status: offline
where is the I Like button? ;D

(in reply to Simulation01)
Post #: 9
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/1/2013 8:12:35 PM   
elanaagain


Posts: 254
Joined: 6/6/2013
Status: offline
i like

_____________________________

USA = Corporatist Serfdom of America: free range surf technology

(in reply to Seath)
Post #: 10
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/2/2013 4:06:41 PM   
Carewolf

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 9/20/2010
Status: offline
I would add Support sub-roles to the destoyer, cruiser and capital ships. Support is assault with long range weapons, and a stance of keeping at maximum range. They can carry more weapons since they can be slower and less manueverable than ships that need to go into close combat. Also they can carry fleet buff components (fleet ECM, fleet targeting).

(in reply to elanaagain)
Post #: 11
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/2/2013 7:24:37 PM   
Dotdotdot

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 11/26/2011
Status: offline
Rather than have defined sub-roles, CodeForce should use a generic sub-role system.

I.E: Instead of having Escort/Assault/Hunter, you'd have Escort (Sub-Role 1), Escort (Sub-Role 2). You could rename the roles as you please, but a Sub-Role 1 ship will only retrofit to an upgrade of Sub-Role 1, and so on and so forth, unless the player changes their settings to allow sub-roles to retrofit outside of their upgrade path.

(in reply to Carewolf)
Post #: 12
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/3/2013 6:18:37 AM   
Shark7


Posts: 7859
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dotdotdot

Rather than have defined sub-roles, CodeForce should use a generic sub-role system.

I.E: Instead of having Escort/Assault/Hunter, you'd have Escort (Sub-Role 1), Escort (Sub-Role 2). You could rename the roles as you please, but a Sub-Role 1 ship will only retrofit to an upgrade of Sub-Role 1, and so on and so forth, unless the player changes their settings to allow sub-roles to retrofit outside of their upgrade path.


Which is fine, the main thing I'd like to see is my designs upgrade to the next design of the same subtype, not all my DDs turning in to generic DD 3, when before I had DD 1 and DD 2 designs that were optimized for different missions. The real problem is that there really is no reason for custom designs when the AI only utilizes the last one you made.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Dotdotdot)
Post #: 13
RE: Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist - 7/3/2013 8:10:13 PM   
mllange

 

Posts: 525
Joined: 2/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: arkhometha

Well, Shark7, I agree with your wishes until Diplomacy: Alliances. I found your definition of alliances too... strict. For example, I don't think allies should be forced to go to war. Backstabbing should happen, nobody should be forced to automatically declare war. They should be asked if they want to go to war. I also don't think there should be any other benefits from alliances, like military or economically. Maybe some increased immigration, espionage chance between allies and maybe tourism, as you suggested. Allies relations should be good but they should deteriorate normally and there shouldn't be too much pre-definitions. Like, a pacific and a aggressive race shouldn't normally ally but there should be no problems between bugs and humans, or a "neutral" race to ally with aggressive or passive races.



+1

My wishlist? Start with Aurora 4X (Pentarch) and implement (almost) everything, then improve from there.

Kidding aside, I do love the feel and scope of Aurora over anything else available. Distant Wars still just leaves me feeling a bit underwhelmed in terms of the scope and depth of play. Every game feels almost the same in spite of the expansions. Of course many of the ideas presented above aren't available in Aurora either, and I agree they would add to the game.

_____________________________

There's a simple answer to every complex question - and it's wrong.
-Umberto Eco

(in reply to arkhometha)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series >> Distant Dreams - Shark's Wishlist Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156